/lit/ - Literature

Greatest pleb-filter in Western canon? Pic related for me.

Did he ever say anything that was worth knowing?

>u cant know nuffin
So this is the power of continental philosophy

How do you go from this:
>leave pre-socratics, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Marx and Nietzsche to me
To this:
>stop doing philosophy
?

stemfags need not apply

In order to come to terms with Heidegger, one must "determine essence of man soley in terms of his relationship to being." This can only be done by eliminating the accidental and trivial as we concentrate on the core of human (and personal) being.

Only by the anticipation of death is every accidental and "provisional" possibility driven out. By grasping the the "finitude of one's existence," one frees oneself from the shallow "multiplicity of possibilities" that life presents to us.

So how can I bring myself to recognize this presence of death in my comfy and childish life? Can anyone suggest further reading about death or life's end that will assist us in this undertaking?

INB4 kys, I don't want to die I want to understand my own being.

Is it worth to study him? Particularly Being and Time?

>>10400772

>Dude, you gotta know shit before you can know shit, also, just b urself :^)

Stop eating processed food

Leave being a charlatan psued to me

Anyone ever read Being and Time? Any thoughts or advice for getting through it?

I'm taking a course next semester and Being and Time is the main book I'm gonna have to get through

Well lads it's coming time to choose classes for next semester. I'm thinking about taking a class on Being and Time--is it worth it?

>>10221418
Was he the biggest mistake in western thought?

>>10194033
Forgot pic

Was he even continental?

Oh, and don't bother fucking with ontology: this guy's got it covered.

*academically bastardizes Nietzsche*

/lit/ view on Heidegger?

>>9789526
hahaha you faggot

pic related's being and time for me

>just b yourself

>>9608404
and?

>All research—and not least that which operates within the range of the central question of Being—is an ontical possibility of Dasein. Dasein’s Being finds its meaning in temporality. But temporality is also the condition which makes historicality possible as a temporal kind of Being which Dasein itself possesses, regardless of whether or how Dasein is an entity ‘in time’. Historicality, as a determinate character, is prior to what is called “history” (world-historical historizing).

Ah, got it, thanks

>As we have seen, it is an essential characteristic of Dasein that, in its ordinary ways of engaging with other entities, it operates with a preontological understanding of Being, that is, with a distorted or buried grasp of the a priori conditions that, by underpinning the taking-as structure, make possible particular modes of Being. This suggests that a disciplined investigation of those everyday modes of engagement on the part of Dasein (what Heidegger calls an “existential analytic of Dasein”) will be a first step towards revealing a shared but hidden underlying meaning of Being. Heidegger puts it like this: whenever an ontology takes for its theme entities whose character of Being is other than that of Dasein, it has its own foundation and motivation in Dasein's own ontical structure, in which a pre-ontological understanding of Being is comprised as a definite characteristic… Therefore fundamental ontology, from which alone all other ontologies can take their rise, must be sought in the existential analytic of Dasein. (Being and Time 3: 33–4)

Was he just copypastaing schopenhauer?

This guy is based
Being and Time isn't even that hard if you take notes. You don't need more than a pretty basic concept of what philosophy was before him because he is poiting at the axiom in which it all was based. He is almost pedagogical in this sense.
Why aren't you reading him?
Are there any books/authors that critic him and his work?
What are your thoughts on his work?